TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (12) TMI 1669
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....11.2012 to the effect that the Motor Vehicle Inspectors in the Humanabad RTO Check Post are colluding with private persons and receiving illegal gratification from public, while performing the duty of checking the vehicles passing through the said check post, registered a suo-moto case in Crime No. 09/12 for offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The petitioner was arrested along with other accused. He was released on bail. The police are yet to file the final report in respect of the said case. In the meanwhile, the first respondent-the State Government passed an order dated 8.1.2013 keeping the petitioner under suspension and the second respondent-The Commissioner for Transport passed another order of suspension dated 5.1.2013 keeping the petitioner under suspension with effect from 28.11.2012 on the ground that he had been detained in police custody for more than 48 hours. Aggrieved by the said orders of suspension dated 8.1.2013 and 5.1.2013 the petitioner approached the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal in Application No. 528/13 seeking to quash the impugned order of suspension passed by the first and second respondents. After s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....igh Court of Karnataka at Dharwad and Gulbarga. It was stated in the Notification dated 19.10.2004 that the date of sitting will be notified later. The Full Court of the High Court, vide Resolution dated 03.06.2008, has resolved to commence the sitting of Judges and Division Courts at the Circuit Benches at Dharwad and Gulbarga on 7.7.2008. The Full Court has also resolved that the cases arising from the Districts of Bagalkot, Bellary, Belgaum, Dharwad, Gadag, Haveri, Uttara Kannada-Karwar and Koppal will be heard and decided at the Circuit Bench at Dharwad and cases arising from the Districts of Bidar, Bijapur, Gulbarga and Raichur will be heard and decided at the Circuit Bench at Gulbarga. It has been further resolved that pending cases from the above mentioned districts will be transferred to the respective Circuit Bench before 07.07.2008 and that filing of new cases at the Circuit Benches will be permitted from 07.07.2008. In the above circumstances, the Hon'ble Chief Justice, High Court of Karnataka has been pleased to order that sitting of Judges and Division Courts at the Circuit Benches at Dharwad and Gulbarga will commence on 07.07.2008; that cases ar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the Districts of Bidar, Bijapur, Gulbarga and Raichur, in order to exercise the jurisdiction and powers of the time being vested in that High Court in the State of Karnataka. 5. Notwithstanding anything in subparagraphs (i) and (ii), of paragraph 4, the Chief Justice of the High Court of Karnataka may, in his discretion, order that any case or class of cases arising in any such district shall be heard at Bangalore. 9. In the Notifications issued on 4.6.2008, the Chief Justice of the High Court in pursuance of the resolution of the Full Court of the High Court was making arrangements for sitting of Judges and Division Courts at the Circuit Benches at Dharwad and Gulbarga. Further he was making an arrangement for hearing of cases "arising from" Districts of Bagalkot, Bellary, Belgaum, Dharwad, Gadag, Haveri, Uttara Kannada-Karwar and Koppal at Circuit Bench at Dharwad and case arising out of Districts of Bidar, Gulbarga, Bijapur and Raichur will be heard and decided at the Circuit Bench at Gulbarga. Similarly in the Notification dated 14.8.2013 insofar as jurisdiction of the permanent Bench is concerned, all that has been said at clause 4 of the said order was that case....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... inclusion of such elaborate provisions appears to have been occasioned by the belief that, armed by such provisions, the superior Courts would be insulated from any executive or legislative attempts to interfere with the making of their decisions. The Judges of the superior Courts have been entrusted with the task of upholding the Constitution and to this end, have been conferred the power to interpret it. It is they who have to ensure that the balance of power envisaged by the Constitution is maintained and that the legislature and the executive do not, in the discharge of their functions, transgress constitutional limitations. It is equally their duty to oversee that the judicial decisions rendered by those who man the subordinate Courts and tribunals do not fall foul of strict standards of legal correctness and judicial independence. The constitutional safeguards which ensure the independence of the Judges of the superior judiciary, are not available to the Judges of the subordinate judiciary or to those who man tribunals created by ordinary legislations. Consequently, Judges of the latter category can never be considered full and effective substitutes for the superior judiciar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....6/227 of the Constitution, before a Division Bench of the High Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the particular Tribunal falls. 12. The object of the framers of our Constitution in adopting Article 226 was to remove all the limitations and to place all the High Courts in the territory of India in the same situation as the High Court of England in the matter of the power to issue the writs, and in some respects even in a better position. The makers of the Constitution having decided to provide for certain basic safeguards for the people in the new set up, which they called fundamental rights, thought it necessary to provide a quick and inexpensive remedy for the enforcement of such rights. Being a Constitutional power, the power under Article 226 is not fettered by anything contained in any statutory provision. The power under Article 226 is available not only for the enforcement of fundamental rights which are created for the first time by the Constitution but also for the enforcement of legal rights. The jurisdiction conferred on the High Court under Article 226 is very wide. The remedy under Article 226 is pre-eminently a public law remedy. Article 226 not being one ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....warranto and certiorari, or any of them for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part-III and for any other purpose.} 15. Article 226(1) neither speaks about location of a Government or about functioning of the Government. Therefore, the residence or location of the Government or of the person affected by any act of the Government has no relevance on the question of High Court's jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of the High Court depends on the person or authority passing the order and the place where the said order is passed or act or omission against which relief sought took place and whether the said place is within those territories in relation to which the High Court exercises jurisdiction. 16. A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of Lt. Col. Khajoor Singh vs. Union of India and Another (AIR 1961 SC 532) held as under:- "13. This brings us to the first question, namely, whether the Government of India as such can be said to be located at one place, namely, New Delhi. The main argument in this connection is that the Government of India is all-pervasive and is functioning throughout the territory of India 'and therefore every Hig....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....titutional amendment in Art. 226. But the argument of inconvenience, in our opinion cannot affect the plain language of Art. 226, nor can the concept of the place of cause of action be introduced into it for that would do away with the two limitations on the powers of the High Court contained in it. 57. ..... while the Government of India is within the territories of every High Court in India the only High Court which has jurisdiction to issue a writ or order or directions under Art. 226 or Art. 32(2A) against it is the one within the territories under which the act or omission against which relief was sought took place. 17. As a result of the view taken by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid case and other cases that it was location or residence of the respondent which gave territorial jurisdiction to a High Court under Article 226, the situs of the cause of action was held to be immaterial. Therefore, the decisions of the Supreme Court led to the result that only the High Court of Punjab would have jurisdiction to entertain petitions under Article 226 against the Union of India and those other bodies which were located in Delhi. It involved considerable hardship to lit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Article 226 of the Constitution. The amendment by which clause (2) is inserted is thus aimed at widening the width of the area for reaching the writs issued by different High Courts. From the provision in clause (2) of Article 226 it is clear that the maintainability or otherwise of the writ petition in the High Court depends on whether the cause of action for filing the same arose, wholly or in part, within the territorial jurisdiction of that Court. The legislative history of the constitutional provisions, therefore, makes it clear that after 1963, cause of action is relevant and germane and a writ petition can be instituted in a High Court within the territorial jurisdiction of which cause of action in whole or in part arises. After 15th amendment to the Constitution, by introduction of clause (2) of Article 226 power is conferred on the High Courts to exercise jurisdiction beyond the territories of the State over which it has jurisdiction. Such a power is conferred subject to the fulfillment of one condition that the cause of action for issue of such writ should wholly or in part arise within the jurisdiction of the State over which it has jurisdiction. 23. This provision h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... every High Court shall have power throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate cases, any Government, 'within those territories' directions, orders of writs, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by part III or for any other purpose. Under clause (2) of Article 226 of High Court may exercise its power conferred by clause (1) if the cause of action, wholly or in part, had arisen within the territory over which it exercises jurisdiction, notwithstanding that the seat of such Government or authority or the residence of such person is not within those territories. On a plain reading of the aforesaid two clauses of Article 226 of the Constitution it becomes clear that a High Court can exercise the power to issue directions, orders or writs for the enforcement of any of the fundamental rights conferred by Part III of the Constitution or for any other purpose if the cause of action, wholly or in part, had arisen within the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, notwithstanding that the seat of the Government or authority or the residence of the person agai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tional aspect of the courts. As per that section the suit could be instituted in a Court within the legal limits of whose jurisdiction the "cause of action wholly or in part arises". Judicial pronouncements have accorded almost a uniform interpretation to the said compendious expression even prior to the Fifteenth Amendments of the Constitution as to mean the bundle of facts which it would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove, if traversed, in order to support his right to the judgment of the Court. 27. The Apex Court in the case of Rajashthan High Court Advocates' Association vs. Union of India and others reported in 2001 (2) SCC 294 held as under: 17. The expression "cause of action" has acquired a judicially-settled meaning. In the restricted sense cause of action means the circumstances forming the infraction of the right or the immediate occasion for the action. In the wider sense, it means the necessary conditions for the maintenance of the suit, including not only the infraction of the right, but the infraction coupled with the right itself. Compendiously the expression means every fact which it would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove, if traversed, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dispute involved in the case, do not give rise to a cause of action so as to confer territorial jurisdiction on the court concerned..... 29. In the case of Kusum Ingots & Alloys Ltd. vs. Union of India and Another ((2004) 6 SCC 254) the question that arose was "whether the seat of Parliament or the legislature of a State would be a relevant factor for determining the territorial jurisdiction of a High Court to entertain a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution?" In answering the said question, the Supreme Court held as under:- 21. A parliamentary legislation when it receives the assent of the President of India and is published in the Official Gazette, unless specifically excluded, will apply to the entire territory of India. If passing of a legislation gives rise to a cause of action, a writ petition questioning the constitutionality thereof can be filed in any High Court of the country. It is not so done because a cause of action will rise only when the provisions of the Act or some of them which were implemented shall give rise to civil or evil consequences to the petitioner. A writ court, it is well settled, would not determine a constitutional question....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... infringed by the respondent within the territorial limits of the Court's jurisdiction and such infringement may take place by causing him actual injury or threat thereof. 8. Two clauses of Article 226 of the Constitution on plain reading give clear indication that the High Court can exercise pouter to issue direction, order or writs for the enforcement of any of the fundamental rights conferred by Part III of the Constitution or for any other purpose if the cause of action wholly or in part had arisen within the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction notwithstanding that the seat of the Government or authority or the residence of the person against whom the direction, order or writ is issued is not within the said territories. 9. By "cause of action" it is meant every fact, which, if traversed, it would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove in order to support his right to a judgment of the Court. In other words, a bundle of facts, which it is necessary for the plaintiff to prove in order to succeed in the suit. 10. In a generic and wide sense (as in Section 20 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908) "cause of action" means every fac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he meaning attributed to the phrase "cause of action" in a common legal parlance is existence of those facts, which give a party a right to judicial interference on his behalf. 31. The Apex Court in the case of Ambica Industries vs. Commissioner of Central Excise reported in (2007) 6 SCC 769 held as under: 13. The Tribunal, as noticed hereinabove, exercises jurisdiction over all the three States. In all the three States there are High Courts. In the event, the aggrieved person is treated to be the dominus litis, as a result whereof, he elects to file the appeal before one or the other High Court, the decision of the High Court shall be binding only on the authorities which are within its jurisdiction. It will only be of persuasive value on the authorities functioning under a different jurisdiction. If the binding authority of a High Court does not extend beyond its territorial jurisdiction and the decision of one High Court would not be a binding precedent for other High Courts or Courts or tribunals outside its territorial jurisdiction, some sort of judicial anarchy shall come into play. An assessee, affected by an order of assessment made at Bombay, may invoke the jur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion was the action of the security/intelligence officials at Hyderabad Airport (in Andhra Pradesh) who having inspected the cash carried by him, alerted their counterparts at Chennai Airport that the appellant was carrying a huge sum of money, and required to be intercepted and questioned. A part of the cause of action therefore clearly arose in Hyderabad. It is also to be noticed that the consequential income tax proceedings against him, which he challenged in the writ petition, were also initiated at Hyderabad. Therefore, his writ petition ought not to have been rejected on the ground of want of jurisdiction. 34. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Chief General Manager vs. D.V. Kavitha in W.P. No. 19826/2010, was considering the objections raised by the High Court Office regarding maintainability of writ petition before the Bench at Dharwad. When it was contended that as the said case arises from the district of Bellary, in terms of the notification dated 04.06.2008, it is only the Circuit Bench at Dharwad, which has jurisdiction to entertain, this Court held as under:- 7........ Wherefore, it is clear that the order dt. 30.05.2009 against which responden....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Even if a small fraction of cause of action arises within the jurisdiction of the Court, the Court would have territorial jurisdiction to entertain the Writ Petition. Nevertheless, it must be a part of cause of action nothing less than that. 36. In Halsbury's Law of England (4th Edn.) it has been stated as follows: "Cause of action" has been defined as meaning simply a factual situation, the existence of which entitles one person to obtain from the court a remedy against another person. The phrase has been held from earliest time to include every fact which is material to be proved to entitle the plaintiff to succeed, and every fact which a defendant would have a right to traverse. 'Cause of action' has also been taken to mean that a particular act on the part of the defendant which gives the plaintiff his cause of complaint, or the subject-matter of grievance founding the action, not merely the technical cause of action. 37. In Stroud's Judicial Dictionary a "cause of action" is stated to be the entire set of facts that gives rise to an enforceable claim; the phrase comprises every facts, which, if traversed, the plaintiff must prove in order to obta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e relief prayed for by the plaintiff. It refers entirely to the ground set forth in the plaint as the cause of action, or, in other words, to the basis upon which the plaintiff asks the Court to arrive at a conclusion in his favour. 41. When an order is passed by a court or Tribunal or an appellate/executive authority whether under the provisions of a statute or otherwise, a part of cause of action arises at that place. In a given case, the original authority which passed the original order may constitute in one place and Appellate Authority is constituted at another place. The place from where the appellate order or a revisional order is passed may give rise to part of cause of action although the original order was at a place outside the said area. A Writ Petition challenging the order of Appellate Authority would lie both at the place where the original order was passed as well as the place where the appellate order was passed. Even if the original order does not fall within the jurisdiction of a particular court, if the appellate order or revisional order falls within its jurisdiction as part of cause of action arising within its jurisdiction, the Court within whose jurisdic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the respondents who are situated within Bangalore city within the jurisdiction of Principal Bench of High Court of Karnataka. Even if that order had been passed by an authority within jurisdiction of Bijapur District which falls within the jurisdiction of a Bench at Gulbarga as the said order has to be challenged before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal (for short 'KAT'), the petitioner had to approach the KAT which is situated at Bangalore. Against the order passed by the KAT the person aggrieved has a right to approach the bench within whose jurisdiction, KAT is situated. Therefore, when the impugned order is passed within the jurisdiction of the Principal Bench at Bangalore, the Principal Bench at Bangalore has jurisdiction to entertain the Writ Petition. Similarly because the petitioner was working and residing at Bidar coming within the jurisdiction of Gulbarga Bench and an order is passed keeping him under suspension, even if it is to be held that the case is arising from out of Bidar, the petitioner is entitled to challenge the said orders both at the principal bench at Bangalore and bench at Gulbarga. The choice is that of the petitioner. Therefore, the Writ Pet....